"Why Should A Secular Government Control Places Of Worship Of Just One Community?"

More than a month back, spiritual speaker-author Dushyanth Sridhar and historian Vikram Sampath filed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) in the Supreme Court to bring accountability to the functioning of Hindu temples across the country and divest control of the government over these places of worship.

The devotees of Lord Venkateshwara of Tirumala in Tirupati came in for a rude shock in mid-September when the Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister claimed that the famous Tirupati laddus (also known as Srivari laddus) offered at the temple contained animal fat. The fire has refused to die down since then, and the movement to free Hindu temples seems to have gained a fresh lease of life. 

This writer spoke with Sridhar to discuss his petition and the struggle to bring temples out of government control. 

What prompted you to file the PIL at the Supreme Court?

The issue of government control over Hindu temples is not new, but this particular instance was unique. Tirupati is one of the most revered temples worldwide, with an unmatched expanse of literature and inscriptions dedicated to it. When the Tirupati Laddu controversy broke out, it deeply hurt me. Regardless of whether devotees are vegetarians or non-vegetarians, the Laddu holds significant religious importance for devotees of Sri Venkateswara. Traces of items like beef tallow and fish oil, strictly forbidden in temple prasadam, were reportedly found. This was extremely painful. The Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanams (TTD) has a stringent recruitment process and a history spanning over eight decades — so how could something like this happen?

My friend Vikram Sampath and I discussed the issue and felt that merely tweeting or commenting wouldn’t help. Social media can bring attention to issues but rarely offers solutions. We needed a legal approach to address this problem facing our dharma. Filing a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) seemed the right way forward.

How has the response to your action been so far?

In less than a week, the Supreme Court took up our petitions for hearing. Alongside the Tirupati Laddu controversy, another major issue is the relinquishment of government control over Hindu places of worship. I’m not claiming that this specific controversy occurred solely because of government control, but, it raises a larger question: Why should a secular government control places of worship for only one community and not others? This question becomes more relevant given the perceived religious affiliations of the previous Jagan Reddy government.

Once temples are returned to the Hindu community, we will bear full responsibility for what happens moving forward. Traditional administrative structures still function well in prominent temples like Padmanabhaswamy and Srirangam Ranganathaswamy. However, attention must also be given to smaller temples in remote areas. With the return of responsibility, a revival is possible. 

The burden of temple upkeep shouldn't rest on any particular varna or community; anyone can contribute. Whether through financial support or volunteer work, everyone can play a role in helping. At one time, temples were the centres of literature, arts, and community service, and with collective effort, they can be revitalised.

How long would it take for power to transfer from the government to the people if the government agrees?

The number of temples has increased over the decades, and managing them is a monumental task. This shift won’t happen overnight, but the first step is for the government to withdraw from temple administration. Decisions regarding temple governance — such as who should be recruited — should not concern a secular government. There’s no logic to it. 

There are concerns about potential mismanagement when temples are returned to private hands. However, many temples and their properties are already in poor condition. What have the governments done so far? They have not been successful.

What should happen next with the Tirupati Laddu controversy?

The primary goal of the PIL is to identify the culprits behind the adulteration. If the reports prove false, we’ll be relieved. But if adulteration did occur, those responsible must be held accountable. We need to know if the supplier will be blacklisted and how quality control will be maintained going forward. Tirumala can certainly afford to have an advanced lab for testing.

Beyond this, the legal community must work together to enable the freedom of temples. The government has no place in this. After giving multiple interviews in the aftermath of the controversy, I realised that simply talking about it wasn’t enough. There needs to be a concrete solution, and this PIL represents our collective frustration and desire for action.